Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:22:54.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving Galileo's Carrier-Phase Time Transfer Based on Prior Constraint Information

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2018

Pengfei Zhang ,
Rui Tu ,
Yuping Gao ,
Na Liu  and
Rui Zhang
Pengfei Zhang
Affiliation:
(National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600) (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 100049)
Rui Tu*
Affiliation:
(National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600) (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 100049) (Key Laboratory of Precision Navigation and Timing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600)
Yuping Gao
Affiliation:
(National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600)
Na Liu
Affiliation:
(National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600)
Rui Zhang
Affiliation:
(National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600) (Key Laboratory of Precision Navigation and Timing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi'an, China, 710600)
*
(E-mail: turui-2004@126.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Carrier-Phase (CP) technique used in the Global Positioning System (GPS) has proved to be a useful spatial tool for remote precise time transfer. Galileo is a Global Navigation Satellite System like GPS. However, currently, given the low number of satellites at any one observation epoch, Galileo's accuracy and continuity of time transfer leave much to be desired. To achieve better performance of time transfer for Galileo, this study has developed a new approach for Galileo CP time transfer, using prior constraint information such as precise coordinates and troposphere zenith delay constraints. The new approach was applied for precise time transfer in real-time mode and post-processed mode for short baseline and long baseline observations. For the short baseline time link in real-time mode, compared with the standard Galileo CP, the standard deviation improved by 51·4% for the troposphere zenith delay constraint, 47·6% for the station coordinates constraint, and 49·5% when considering both constraints simultaneously. At a 10,000 s time interval, in comparison to the standard CP, the three constraint approaches show stable results as well as improvements of nearly an order of magnitude. In post-processed mode, the constraint approach for Galileo time transfer showed little improvement compared to the standard CP technique for both the short baseline and long baseline time links.

Keywords

GalileoPrior constraint informationTime transferCarrier phaseTroposphere zenith delay constraintStation coordinates constraint
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 121 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Angrisano, A., Gaglione, S., Gioia, C., Borio, D. and Fortuny-Guasch, J. (2013). Testing the test satellites: the Galileo IOV measurement accuracy. Proceedings of the international conference on localization and GNSS (ICL-GNSS 2013 Torino), 1–6.Google Scholar
Defraigne, P., Bruyninx, C. and Guyennon, N. (2007). PPP and phase only GPS frequency transfer. Proceedings of the IEEE International Frequency Control Symposium Jointly with the 21st European Frequency and Time Forum (EFTF ’07), 904–908, Geneva, Switzerland, May–June.Google Scholar
Deng, Z., Ge, M., Uhlemann, M. and Zhao, Q. (2014). Precise orbit determination of BeiDou Satellites at GFZ. IGS Workshop, Pasadena, 23–27, June.Google Scholar
Diessongo, T., Schüler, T. and Junker, S. (2014). Precise position determination using a Galileo E5 single-frequency receiver. GPS Solutions, 18, 73–83.Google Scholar
Furthner, J., Moudrak, A., Konovaltsev, A. and Denks, H. (2003). Galileo Time Dissemination and Common View: How Accurate Will It Be? Proceedings of the 35th PTTI meeting, December 2–4. San Diego, 185–197.Google Scholar
Ge, M., Gendt, G., Dick, G. and Zhang, FP. (2005). Improving carrier-phase ambiguity resolution in global GPS network solutions. Journal of Geodesy, 79(1–3), 103–110.Google Scholar
Gioia, C., Borio, D., Angrisano, A., Gaglione, S. and Fortuny-Guasch, J. (2015). A Galileo IOV assessment: measurement and position domain. GPS Solutions, 19, 187–199.Google Scholar
Hahn, J. H., Achkar, J., Tuckey, P., Jones, R. and Pieplu, J. M. (2007). Galileo's time keeping infrastructure: where do we go with the external time service provider? IEEE International Frequency Control Symposium Joint with the 21st European Frequency and Time Forum, Geneva, pp. 452–457. doi:10.1109/FREQ.2007.4319115.Google Scholar
Hatch, R. (1982). The synergism of GPS code and carrier measurements. In: Proceedings of the third international symposium on satellite Doppler positioning at physical sciences laboratory of New Mexico State University, Feb. 8–12, Vol. 2, pp. 1213–1231.Google Scholar
Hlaváč, R., Lösch, M., Luongo, F. and Hahn, J. (2006). Timing Infrastructure for Galileo System. Proceedings of the 20th European Frequency and Time Forum (EFTF), 27–30 March, Braunschweig, Germany. pp. 391–398.Google Scholar
Jiang, Z., Lewandowski, W. (2012). Use of GLONASS for UTC time transfer. Metrologia, 49, 57–61.Google Scholar
Jiang, Z., Matsaklis, D., Zhang, V. S., Hector, E., Dirk, P. and Shinn-Yan, L. (2016). A TWSTFT calibration guideline and the use of a GPS calibrator for UTC TWSTFT link calibrations. Proceedings of the 2016 Precise Time and Time Interval Meeting, ION PTTI 2016, California, January, 25–28.Google Scholar
Li, X., Ge, M., Dai, X., Ren, X., Fritsche, M., Wickert, J. and Schuh, H. (2015). Accuracy and reliability of multi-GNSS real-time precise positioning: GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, and Galileo. Journal of Geodesy, 89(6), 607–635. doi:10.1007/s00190-015-0802-8.Google Scholar
Lindström, G., Gasparini, G. (2003). The Galileo satellite system and its security implications. In: Occasional Papers 44, European Union Institute for Security.Google Scholar
Paziewski, J., Wielgosz, P. (2014). Assessment of GPS+Galileo and multi-frequency Galileo single-epoch precise positioning with network corrections. GPS Solutions, 18, 571–579.Google Scholar
Petit, G. and Luzum, B. (2010). International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS) Conventions. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag des Bundesamts für Kartographie und Geodäsie, 179 pp. ISBN 3-89888-989-6. Also available from https://www.iers.org/IERS/EN/Publications/TechnicalNotes/tn36.html.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, J.A.A., Hein, G.W., Irsigler, M. and Pany, T. (2004). Combined Galileo/GPS frequency and signal performance analysis. Proceedings of the ION GNSS 2004 Long Beach, September, California, 1–16.Google Scholar
Rovera, G.D., Torre, J-M., Sherwood, R., Abgrall, M., Courde, C., Laas-Bourez, M. and Uhrich, P. (2014). Link calibration against receiver calibration: an assessment of GPS time transfer uncertainties. Metrologia, 51, 476–490.Google Scholar
Saastamoinen, J. (1972). Contributions to the theory of atmospheric refraction. Bulletin Géodésique, 105(1), pp. 279–298.Google Scholar
Schildknecht, T., Beutler, G. and Rotacher, M. (1990). Towards sub-nanosecond GPS time transfer using geodetic processing technique. Proceedings of the 4th European Frequency and Time Forum, 335–346.Google Scholar
Simsky, A., Mertens, D., Sleewaegen, J. M., Hollreiser, M. and Crisci, M. (2008). Multipath and tracking performance of Galileo ranging signals transmitted by GIOVE-B. Proceedings of ION GNSS-2008, The Institute of Navigation, Savannah Georgia, September 16–19, 1525–1536.Google Scholar
Steigenberger, P. and Montenbruck, O. (2016). Galileo status: orbits, clocks, and positioning. GPS Solutions, 21(2), 319–331, doi:10.1007/s10291-016-0566-5.Google Scholar
Uhlemann, M., Gendt, G., Ramatschi, M. and Deng, Z. (2015). GFZ Global Multi-GNSS Network and Data Processing Results. Rizos C., Willis P. (eds) IAG 150 Years. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, Springer, Cham, 143, 673–679.Google Scholar
Yao, J. and Levine, J. (2012). GPS Carrier-Phase Time Transfer Boundary Discontinuity Investigation. Proceedings of the 44th Annual PTTI Systems and Applications Meeting, 317–326.Google Scholar